‘Aarakshan’ : Baseless reservations! (Part 1)

Although, I am not amongst those who would purposely skip a Prakash Jha movie, proclaiming it to be too grave, serious and realist for their frivolous liking, I almost dropped the idea of watching ‘Aarakshan’ after getting to know its dismal performance in the ratings department and the critics’ arena. The fact, that its’ release has been banned in Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and Andhra Pradesh, while the Maharashtra government wanted specific scenes to be cut, did infuse some curiosity in me ( I am sure, it did the same in many others, being considered one of the most effective publicity stunts). But, when I sifted through the review columns, in which the movie had hardly fetched more than 2 stars out of 5 and was dismissed as ‘All smoke No fire’ and a ‘Lost Cause’, my recently aroused spirits were dampened. Eventually, a friend persuaded me to watch it and I am glad that I did. I got to know that just like looks, reviews and ratings can be deceiving too!

‘Aarakshan’ has suffered blows, primarily on two accounts. Firstly, the movie has been banned in many states on the ground that it has the capacity to incite public sentiments and inflame passions. Secondly, critics have declared the movie to be so unsubstantial on the issue of reservation that it only portrays a ‘docile nod or two’ on the issue in the first half, while completely loosing focus in the second. This does not make sense to me. The arguments are contradictory. They cannot exist together. A movie can either be effective or unsubstantial. Let me deconstruct both the presumptions. I will deal with the banning issue, in the first part of this blog post.

Every time a movie undergoes severe cuts or bans, there is an outcry against such ‘stifling and gagging’ of the Freedom of Speech and Expression which is guaranteed by the Constitution of India as a Fundamental Right under Article 19(1) (a). The ‘intelligentsia’ of our nation has to shout its throat hoarse that ‘We, the people of India’ should not be dictated terms as to what we should or should not see. It has to be reminded to the concerned authorities time and again that after all, ‘Freedom’ is the possibility of doubting, of making mistakes, of searching and experimenting and most importantly, of being able to say ‘NO’ to any forceful authority-Literary, Artistic, Philosophical, Religious, Social or Political. So true! But then comes Article 19 (2) announcing that no Fundamental Right is absolute. Certain reasonable restrictions have to be imposed on the grounds like Public order, Decency and Morality, Defamation, Incitement to an offence etc. It is here that censorship becomes relevant.

One can fairly understand that under certain circumstances, censorship becomes necessary. In India, The Central Board of Film Certification (popularly known as the Censor Board) is responsible for such censorship. It is a regulatory body controlled by Ministry of Information and Broadcasting which is responsible for reviewing, rating and censoring motion pictures and their public exhibition under The Cinematograph Act (1952). Although, sometimes even Censor Board’s decisions become too difficult to handle (for example, passing ‘Delhi Belly’ without cutting an iota of the putrid vocabulary and acrid ambience), what becomes difficult to understand is that once a movie has been cleared by the regulatory authority, by what logic can it be banned? Law and order is a state subject and so, any state government under reasonable apprehension of public disorder might take the step of banning a film from being screened in that particular state, comes the answer. But, how tenable is the argument that a few dialogues in the film ‘Aakarshan’ could have led to civil unrest. It has been 5 days since its release and nobody has come across any caste based violence, as a result of the screening of this film. If, after the release of ‘Aarakshan’, no untoward incident has happened in other parts of the country, why should one presume that such incidents would have taken place in the states which have banned it ?On the contrary, this film elaborates on the pros and cons of the reservation policy, substantiating on the one hand, the reasons as to why reservation in educational institutions is essential and on the other, an effective way of countering the complexities associated with the issue (which I will explain in the second part of this blog post).Being a supporter of the reservation policy, being an affirmative action by the state in favor of the weaker sections of our society, what I find absurd is that a Chief Minister who takes so much pride in proclaiming herself as ‘the Dalit leader’ of our country, would ban a movie in which the protagonist explicitly declares that reservation for weaker sections of society, primarily SC/ST and OBC students is desirable even in private educational institutions.

What I find problematic is that, if the subjective discretion of the state governments, of certain offended groups and upset communities, would be made the criterion for deciding upon the dissemination or absolute suppression of information and opinions, the creative artistic forces in our country would be at the mercy of bullies of pressure groups and politically motivated outfits. Today, a few pelted stones, a few burned posters, a few chanted slogans, a few raised eyebrows and trivial apprehensions become sufficient cause for banning films like ‘Aarakshan’, which not just bring important socio-political issue to limelight but hint at their prospective solutions as well. If someone has a problem with the reservation issue, let that person protest against it by legal and constitutional means. But, to say that because so and so person has a problem or might create a problem, the movie itself should be banned and that too by the state government itself, is despotic. We must realize that bans actually, defeat their purpose because eventually, they create a society that is incapable of exercising real discretion.

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.

Comments on this post are closed now

Author

A perfectionist, idealist dreamer. I have always been more curious than cautious and have suffered from an ardent desire to know more, combined with a weakness for engaging in critical debates. As a believer of Gandhian principles, I endorse the doctrine ‘Be the change, you wish to see’. All these descriptions qualify my writings. On the lighter side, I am a movie buff, a foodie and a cricket crazy person. I was the President of Delhi University Students Union, National General Secretary of N.S.U.I. and a part of student activism for more than a decade. I love to indulge in issues concerning students and youth, especially with respect to their association with politics, social initiatives and educational reforms. Also, I believe that in a country where gender justice is still a fragile myth and patriarchal bias is engrained in the social fabric, one need to think, talk and write more and more about ways to counter gender inequality.

A perfectionist, idealist dreamer. I have always been more curious than cautious and have suffered from an ardent desire to know more, combined with a weakn. . .